[Linux-cluster] Two node NFS cluster serving multiple networks
isplist at logicore.net
isplist at logicore.net
Thu Mar 13 20:57:20 UTC 2008
Guess I forgot to edit those IP's :).
I thought you could only have one default gateway on a machine.
I've never needed to deal with multiple nics other than bonded.
PS: What does tab 1/2 mean?
Mike
On Thu, 13 Mar 2008 13:39:25 -0700, Alex Kompel wrote:
> Google "linux policy based routing".
>
> In your example you just need to setup different gateways for both
> interfaces. For example:
> ip route add default via 69.2.237.57 dev eth0 tab 1
> ip route add default via 192.168.1.1 dev eth1 tab 2
>
>
> On Thu, Mar 13, 2008 at 9:23 AM, isplist at logicore.net
> <isplist at logicore.net> wrote:
>> Is there a good document somewhere which explains in not too great
>> technical
>> terms how to use multiple nics on a system. I've been running bonded nics
>> for
>> many years but getting a machine to use two (or more networks) is still a
>> mystery to me.
>>
>> For example, I have a VoIP machine which has two nics which I have
>> problems
>> with because I don't understand the above yet.
>>
>> This machine has a nic allows incoming VoIP/ZIP connections to it's
>> public IP
>> address on a T1. The router blocks everything but that traffic.
>>
>> Then it has a second nic which has a private IP on it to allow for
>> management
>> of the machine. Yet recently, it lost it's DNS, it can't seem to get
>> access to
>> DNS on it's own. I can force it to use DNS by typing ping commands a
>> couple of
>> times but it cannot do it on it's own to get it's updates for example.
>>
>> Basically, I need the machine to see it's public gateway at xx.x.237.59 to
>> route it's VoIP/SIP traffic but I also need it to see it's private
>> gateway at
>> 192.168.1.0 so that it can use DNS and other internal services properly.
>>
>> route -n
>> Kernel IP routing table
>> Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use
>> Iface
>> xx.x.237.56 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.248 U 0 0 0 eth0
>> 192.168.1.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth1
>> 169.254.0.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.0.0 U 0 0 0
>> eth1
>> 0.0.0.0 69.2.237.57 0.0.0.0 UG 0 0 0
>> eth0
>>
>> ifconfig
>> eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:90:27:DC:4B:E6
>> inet addr:xx.x.237.59 Bcast:69.2.237.63 Mask:255.255.255.248
>> inet6 addr: fe80::290:27ff:fedc:4be6/64 Scope:Link
>> UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1
>> RX packets:33910280 errors:16 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:16
>> TX packets:45988648 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
>> collisions:24746 txqueuelen:1000
>> RX bytes:681966199 (650.3 MiB) TX bytes:1657358619 (1.5 GiB)
>>
>> eth1 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:13:20:55:D7:CE
>> inet addr:192.168.1.102 Bcast:192.168.1.255 Mask:255.255.255.0
>> inet6 addr: fe80::213:20ff:fe55:d7ce/64 Scope:Link
>> UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1
>> RX packets:87417784 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
>> TX packets:70881957 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
>> collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000
>> RX bytes:4171601084 (3.8 GiB) TX bytes:1547562481 (1.4 GiB)
>>
>> lo Link encap:Local Loopback
>> inet addr:127.0.0.1 Mask:255.0.0.0
>> inet6 addr: ::1/128 Scope:Host
>> UP LOOPBACK RUNNING MTU:16436 Metric:1
>> RX packets:6501004 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
>> TX packets:6501004 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
>> collisions:0 txqueuelen:0
>> RX bytes:897257336 (855.6 MiB) TX bytes:897257336 (855.6 MiB)
>>
>>
>> Mike
>>
>>
>> On Wed, 12 Mar 2008 10:39:50 -0700, Alex Kompel wrote:
>>> You will still need some way to tell the system through which
>>>
>>> interface you want to route outgoing packets for each target.
>>> You can achieve the same with greater ease by splitting the network in
>>> 2 subnets and assigning each to a single interface.
>>> It all depends on the problem you are trying to solve. If you want
>>> redundancy - use active-passive bonding, you want throughput - use
>>> active-active bonding (if your switch supports link aggregation), if
>>> you want security and isolation - use separate subnets.
>>>
>>> -Alex
>>>
>>> 2008/3/12 Brian Kroth <bpkroth at wisc.edu>:
>>>> This is a hypothetical, but what if you have two interfaces on the
>>>> same
>>>> network and want to force one service IP to one interface and the
>>>> other
>>>> to a different interface? I think what everyone is wondering is how
>>>> much control one has over the service IP placement.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Brian
>>>>
>>>> Finnur Örn Guðmundsson - TM Software <fog at t.is> 2008-03-12 14:36:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> I see no reason why you could not have 3 diffrent interfaces, each
>>>>> connected to the networks you are trying to serve the NFS requests
>>>>> to/from. RG Manager will add the floating interfaces to the
>>>>> "correct"
>>>>> interface, that is, if your floating ip is 1.2.3.4 and you have a
>>>>> interface with the IP address 1.2.3.3 he will add the IP to that
>>>>> interface.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Bgrds,
>>>>> Finnur
>>>>>
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: linux-cluster-bounces at redhat.com [mailto:linux-cluster-
>>>>> bounces at redhat.com] On Behalf Of gordan at bobich.net
>>>>> Sent: 12. mars 2008 14:10
>>>>> To: linux clustering
>>>>> Subject: Re: [Linux-cluster] Two node NFS cluster serving multiple
>>>>> networks
>>>>>
>>>>> Sounds very similar to what I'm trying to achieve (see the other
>>>>> thread
>>>>> about binding failover resources to interfaces). I've not seen a
>>>>> response
>>>>> yet, so I'm most curious to see if you'll get any.
>>>>>
>>>>> Gordan
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, 12 Mar 2008, Randy Brown wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I am using a two node cluster with Centos 5 with up to date
>>>>>> patches.
>>>>>> We have
>>>>>> three different networks to which I would like to serve nfs mounts
>>>>>> from this
>>>>>> cluster. Can this even be done? I have interfaces available for
>>>>>> each
>>>>>> network in each node?
>>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Linux-cluster mailing list
>>>>> Linux-cluster at redhat.com
>>>>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-cluster
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Linux-cluster mailing list
>>>>> Linux-cluster at redhat.com
>>>>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-cluster
>>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Linux-cluster mailing list
>>>> Linux-cluster at redhat.com
>>>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-cluster
>>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Linux-cluster mailing list
>>> Linux-cluster at redhat.com
>>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-cluster
>>
>>
>> --
>> Linux-cluster mailing list
>> Linux-cluster at redhat.com
>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-cluster
>>
>
> --
> Linux-cluster mailing list
> Linux-cluster at redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-cluster
More information about the Linux-cluster
mailing list